PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

NickM wrote:

A Ministry of Defence spokesman said: “Work is ongoing on a Military Technical Cooperation Agreement (MTCA) between the UK MOD and Russian Federal Service for Military Technical Cooperation which will provide a framework for Russian and UK defence companies to cooperate at an unclassified level.”

David Axe wrote:Russia’s Stealth Fighter Could Outfly, Outshoot American Jets


Since its public debut four years ago, Russia’s first stealth fighter has quietly undergone diligent testing, slowly expanding its flight envelope and steadily working out technical kinks. But for all this hard work there have been precious few indications just how many copies of the Sukhoi T-50 Moscow plans to build … and how it means to use them.

Until now.

Fresh reporting from Aviation Week’s Bill Sweetman, one of the world’s top aerospace writers, offers tantalizing hints regarding Moscow’s intentions for the big, twin-engine T-50, an answer to America’s F-22 stealth fighter.

If Sweetman is correct—and he usually is—the angular warplane with the 50-foot wingspan could be bought in small numbers and used as a sort of airborne sniper, elusively flying high and fast to take down enemy radars and support planes using powerful, long-range missiles.

The T-50's design and apparent weapons options seem to lend themselves to this niche role, which could exploit critical vulnerabilities in U.S. and allied forces and level the air power playing field for the first time in a generation.

Especially considering the Chinese are apparently taking the same approach with their own new stealth fighter.

Missile clues
At the MAKS air show near Moscow this week, some of the five T-50 test models possessed by Sukhoi made appearances—and manufacturers also showed off missiles that could be fitted into the T-50's voluminous weapons bays or under its wings and fuselage.

But Sweetman, wandering the show, detected restraint on the part of the stealth fighter’s boosters. He declared the T-50 exhibits “tamer than some people hoped.”

“I suspect that the fighter won’t be in service for some years, except possibly in the form of a small test squadron,” Sweetman noted. Indeed, Moscow recently pushed back the T-50's first frontline use from 2015 to 2016.

But when it does enter service, even in limited numbers the T-50 could have a big impact on rival forces. Scanning the missiles on display at MAKS, Sweetman concluded that the T-50 could be armed with two powerful main weapons: a version of the Kh-58UShE anti-radar missile and the new RVV-BD air-to-air missile.

Both nearly 15 feet long, the Kh-58UShE and RVV-BD can hit targets 120 miles away or farther. The Kh-58UShE homes in on enemy radars; the RVV-BD is for destroying other warplanes.

The smaller AGM-88 anti-radar missile and AIM-120 air-to-air missile are the American analogues of the new Russian weapons. Both several feet shorter and hundreds of pounds lighter than their Russian counterparts, the U.S. munitions reflect a specifically American air-warfare philosophy. American stealth jets including the B-2 bomber, the F-22 and the still-in-development F-35 carry relatively small, lightweight weapons with short ranges.

The B-2's main munition is a 2,000-pound, satellite-guided gravity bomb. For attacking ground targets the F-22 and F-35 rely on a 500-pound, winged guided bomb that can glide up to 60 miles under optimal conditions.

And the F-22 and F-35's AIM-120 air-to-air missile, 12 feet from tip to tail, has a range of probably only 50 miles or so, although the precise distance is classified. Remarkably, no American stealth jets can carry anti-radar missiles like the T-50 probably can.


Air war philosophies
The differences in weapons-loadouts point to opposing U.S. and Russian concepts for using stealth planes. With the exception of the F-22, American radar-evading jets are not particularly fast and must constantly sneak around in order to use their lighter, shorter-range weapons—therefore they need all-around stealth that makes them hard to detect from any angle.

The B-2 can fly thousands of miles but the F-22 and F-35 have modest fuel loads, forcing them to frequently refuel from aerial tankers.

The T-50, on the other hand, is apparently being designed to blast through defenses in a fairly straight line, relying on front-only stealth features, high altitude, sustained speed and long range to swiftly fire long-reaching missiles at vulnerable targets deep behind enemy lines—without the help of aerial tankers, of which Russia possesses few.

Which is not to say the T-50 isn’t also highly maneuverable when it needs to be.

The Russian fighter’s preferred targets might include spy planes, Airborne Warning and Control System/Airborne Early Warning and Command (AWACS/AEW&C) aircraft, tankers and ground-based radars—in other words, all those vital systems that comprise the pricey, high-tech back-end in any U.S.-led air campaign.

Snipe the support systems and their crews and you hobble the enemy’s aerial war effort.

Moscow is not alone if indeed that is its approach to defeating its rivals in technological battle. China, too, has a new stealth fighter, the J-20. It’s big, heavy and potentially fast like the T-50, likewise concentrates its stealth features up front and also has apparent new weapons.

According to the Air Power Australia think tank, the J-20 could be “employed offensively, to punch holes through opposing air defenses by engaging and destroying defending fighter combat air patrols, AWACS/AEW&C aircraft and supporting aerial refueling tankers.”

It’s a sound strategy. A 2008 war game conducted by the U.S. Air Force-sponsored think tank RAND pitted F-22s against older Chinese Su-27-style fighters in a hypothetical air battle over Taiwan. After Chinese bombardment of American airfields, just six F-22s were available to fight 72 Chinese jets.

Backed by support planes, the defending F-22s got in close and shot down 48 Su-27s, but the remaining Chinese planes managed to power through and destroy six tankers, two AWACS, four P-3 patrol planes and two Global Hawk spy drones, effectively crippling the U.S. force. With no tankers to refuel them, the F-22s crashed for lack of gas despite surviving the missile exchanges.

If older Su-27s firing older weapons could do that, newer and better T-50s and J-20s with longer-range missiles might inflict even more devastating losses with fewer casualties of their own.

With these methods, it wouldn’t take many of the new Russian or Chinese jets to make a huge difference in any future air war. So Sweetman’s prediction that the T-50 won’t be built in large numbers any time soon is cold comfort. With its powerful performance and weapons, Russia’s new warplane could tip the balance of power in the air.

One day they criticize , the other day they rub eloquence

Viktor wrote:It will be mix of lunatic, paranoid, paranormal,  schizophrenic reporting about the red menace, evil empire, red tide, red this/that, rise of the bla bla bla

Viktor wrote:Its going to get nasty in a year or two when western media figures it out about the scope of rearmament in Russia     

It will be mix of lunatic, paranoid, paranormal,  schizophrenic reporting about the red menace, evil empire, red tide, red this/that, rise of the bla bla bla

GarryB wrote:Can probably be translated to... the PAK FA is rubbish =  don't cut funding for Typhoon it is still competitive.

And now PAK FA is a threat = we need fresh funding for new upgrades and solutions to this new threat we never saw coming...

NickM wrote:These problems were bound to happen . It's a direct result of a cultural mismatch . Indians think differently than us Europeans so their interpretation of subjects is radically different from our's* .

Brookings.edu wrote:"New" Immigrant Entrepreneurs

Unlike traditional ethnic entrepreneurs who remain isolated in marginal, low-wage industries, Silicon Valley's new foreign-born entrepreneurs are highly educated professionals in dynamic and technologically sophisticated industries. And they have been extremely successful. By the end of the 1990s, Chinese and Indian engineers were running 29 percent of Silicon Valley's technology businesses. By 2000, these companies collectively accounted for more than $19.5 billion in sales and 72,839 jobs. And the pace of immigrant entrepreneurship has accelerated dramatically in the past decade.
brookings.edu

TechAmerica wrote:Foreign nationals of any single country can receive no more than seven percent of available green cards in a specific year. In effect this discriminates against individuals from populous nations that possess huge talent pools, like China and India.
TechAmerica

Rapide immigration wrote:Of particular note is the doubling of the Asian Indian population in the United States within the last ten years. The demand for hi-tech visa workers, (especially software programmers) and the increase in immigrants sponsoring their families are amongst the major reasons for the increase.
RapidImmigration.com

NickM wrote:The new generation of Russians are un willing to accept Communist propaganda that Russia needs to develop closer ties with Asian countries . As a result of which most young Russians are more eager to do business with Europe and US than with Asia or Africa with whom they have no cultural similarity .

NickM wrote:We are already witnessing close military ties between the UK and Russia . I had predicted this long ago

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/10598250/Comrades-in-arms-Britain-and-Russia-to-sign-defence-deal.html

macedonian wrote:
Us Europeans?! I think nothing like you.

macedonian wrote:Of particular note is the doubling of the Asian Indian population in the United States within the last ten years. The demand for hi-tech visa workers, (especially software programmers) and the increase in immigrants sponsoring their families are amongst the major reasons for the increase.

zg18 wrote:

PAK-FA maneuver , Zhukovsky yesterday , from 8,500 to 12,000 meters

NickM wrote:

Most Europeans share my views . You are part of a minority group who have a different view.

NickM wrote:Again most Americans absolutely hate these Indians . I know this for a fact . Don't take my words for it . You can very easily run this fact past any American

NickM wrote:

TR1 wrote:https://medium.com/war-is-boring/d89b9ce721de

Bahaha, oh wow.

These problems were bound to happen . It's a direct result of a cultural mismatch . Indians think differently than us Europeans so their interpretation of subjects is radically different from our's .

Russia should have chosen a European partner or maybe even Brazil for the PAK FA . I feel there is still time for Russia to dump India and sign a deal with Brazil or a European nation .

The new generation of Russians are un willing to accept Communist propaganda that Russia needs to develop closer ties with Asian countries . As a result of which most young Russians are more eager to do business with Europe and US than with Asia or Africa with whom they have no cultural similarity .

We are already witnessing close military ties between the UK and Russia . I had predicted this long ago

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/10598250/Comrades-in-arms-Britain-and-Russia-to-sign-defence-deal.html

Britain could buy weapons from its former Cold War foe for the first time under a landmark defence treaty, the Telegraph can reveal.

Defence chiefs are preparing to sign a deal that would see British defence companies working jointly on projects with the Russian arms industry.

The treaty allows arms companies to buy kit from Russia – and Russian diplomatic sources said they hope one day to see British soldiers carrying the Red Army’s famous Kalashnikov rifle as a result.

Ministry of Defence sources confirmed the deal creates the legal framework for the British Army to buy Russian equipment, but stressed their main focus is on allowing firms to share information and buy components from one another.
The MoD and the Russian Federal Service for Military Technical Co-operation are now studying the draft text. It could be signed in the spring, Moscow sources said, earlier than previously thought after making quick progress.


The deal covers ‘unclassified’ technology, so it is unlikely to allow co-operation on advanced battlefield equipment such as missile systems.

Nevertheless treaty is regarded by defence chiefs and diplomats as a major step forward in the relationship between Britain and Russia, which went into deep freeze following the polonium murder of Alexander Litvinenko in London and the granting of asylum in Britain to some of Mr Putin’s rivals.

The British and Russian security services have worked together to defend the Sochi Olympics, and last year British veterans of the Arctic Convoys, which ferried supplies to the USSR in World War II, were awarded medals recognising their bravery after decades of prevarication by ministers.

President Putin wants to dramatically boost Russia’s arms exports to compete with the European defence industry. He has also announced a radical expansion in military spending in order to overhaul an army and navy that are reliant on hopelessly outdated weapons from the Soviet era. The deal means that British factories are in line to benefit from those orders.
The Russian authorities are keen for a closer business relationship with Britain. Only 600 British firms currently trade in Russia, compared to 7000 German.

The release of British Greenpeace activists who were jailed after protesting on a Russian oilrig, following lobbying from MPs and extensive back-channel negotiations, was seen privately as a minor diplomatic breakthrough.

The US has in recent years spent hundreds of millions of dollars on buying Russian Mi-17 helicopters to give to the Afghan armed forces, although Congress has protested at Russia's role in supplying arms to the Syria conflict.

In 2010 Russia bought two helicopter carrying warships from France, in a deal that caused surprise in a country that had strong shipbuilding industry during the Soviet period.

A Ministry of Defence spokesman said: “Work is ongoing on a Military Technical Cooperation Agreement (MTCA) between the UK MOD and Russian Federal Service for Military Technical Cooperation which will provide a framework for Russian and UK defence companies to cooperate at an unclassified level.”

Having said this, speaking about Russia-UK, it is difficult to have an honest relationship with a woman who is married with someone else, if you get the analogy.

collegeboy16 wrote:Pak-Fa looks like a SAM missile chasing something. Tho its not as stealthy with all that smoke trailes.

macedonian wrote:

zg18 wrote:

PAK-FA maneuver , Zhukovsky yesterday , from 8,500 to 12,000 meters

That's bound to raise a few eyebrows here and there...
I imagine it'll be downplayed by the F-22/F-35 (USA Strong!11) crowd...it'll most probably be: we do maneuvers better than that...but even if we don't (which we most certainly DO!!!!) - Putin is an autocrat, while our freedoms are guaranteed (well, just not lately perhaps, but, you know...)

flamming_python wrote:Depending on the troll, it'll be more like: we do maneuvers better than that...but even if we don't (which we most certainly DO!!!!) - modern air combat is not about maneuvers, climb rate doesn't matter any more, with modern tank FCS it's irrelevant what maneuvers the fighters do they'll still be shot down, etc.. etc.. etc..

mack8 wrote:What smoke?! That's just contrail!

BlackArrow wrote:So what exactly is it doing in that photo, climbing? I thought all aircraft could do that?